"Syria Chemical Attack undeniable" - John Kerry (US Secretary of Stupid Statements) - Polidicks

[url]http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-23844643#FBM277874[/url] [quote] US Secretary of State John Kerry has condemned what he said was the "undeniable" use of chemical weapons by the Syrian government. He described recent attacks in the Damascus area as a "moral obscenity".[/quote] I'd say that John Kerry's blind assumption that the government used such weapons without any sort of actual proof (UN Inspectors, etc...) to justify his role in this war-boner government is a "moral obscenity," but what would I know?

[IMG]http://static.guim.co.uk/sys-images/Guardian/About/General/2011/2/15/1297785986782/Colin-Powell-makes-his-pr-007.jpg[/IMG] EDIT: Just to clarify, I'm 70% confident the government used these weapons, I just think we should slow down and make sure we have all the facts before we start making statements like that.

[QUOTE=Eudoxia;41978404][IMG]http://static.guim.co.uk/sys-images/Guardian/About/General/2011/2/15/1297785986782/Colin-Powell-makes-his-pr-007.jpg[/IMG][/QUOTE] Give me proof the government used the weapons, the fact they were used isn't under question, the side using them is. You can't just assume that the side you're politically disagreeing with is the cause of a problem, especially considering the fact the rebels have so many known terrorist groups within their ranks that are completely willing to use such weapons with no ramifications.

World War III.

Best course of action for the US: Stay the fuck out of it entirely. Likely course the government will actually take: Charge right the fuck in.

[QUOTE=draugur;41978381][url]http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-23844643#FBM277874[/url] I'd say that John Kerry's blind assumption that the government used such weapons without any sort of actual proof (UN Inspectors, etc...) to justify his role in this war-boner government is a "moral obscenity," but what would I know?[/QUOTE] The Syrian government is the only group confirmed to have chemical weapons and posses the ability to use them, it's not a Blum assumption.

[QUOTE=BusterBluth;41979056]The Syrian government is the only group confirmed to have chemical weapons and posses the ability to use them, it's not a Blum assumption.[/QUOTE] Tokyo Subway Attack 1995, a cult without any budget to speak of made the gas (Sarin). The terrorists that US & the allies support in Syria, have the funding of Saudi Arabia & the backing & training of CIA, Mossad, MI6, (2day they received 400 tons of weapons from the Turkish border,including Israeli arms for $50 million sold 2 the Saudis). Anyone claiming that the well financed• terrorists in Syria do not have the capability, don't know much. Assad has nothing to win but everything to lose. The opposite is true for the Head Choppers.

[QUOTE=joqqy;41979109]Tokyo Subway Attack 1995, a cult without any budget to speak of made the gas (Sarin). The terrorists that US & the allies support in Syria, have the funding of Saudi Arabia & the backing & training of CIA, Mossad, MI6, (2day they received 400 tons of weapons from the Turkish border,including Israeli arms for $50 million sold 2 the Saudis). Anyone claiming that the well financed• terrorists in Syria do not have the capability, don't know much. Assad has nothing to win but everything to lose. The opposite is true for the Head Choppers.[/QUOTE] The chemical attack in Syria was more advanced than a couple of guys throwing plastic bags. Please do give a source where the U.S is funding a terrorist faction and when they received chemical weapons with the artillery to use it. It's also great you call them "Head Choppers" when factions with the Syrian government are doing the very same thing.

[QUOTE=draugur;41978422]Give me proof the government used the weapons, the fact they were used isn't under question, the side using them is. You can't just assume that the side you're politically disagreeing with is the cause of a problem, especially considering the fact the rebels have so many known terrorist groups within their ranks that are completely willing to use such weapons with no ramifications.[/QUOTE] I thought it was generally agreed that the rebels don't have any sort of delivery ability like what was clearly used last week.

[QUOTE=draugur;41978422]Give me proof the government used the weapons, the fact they were used isn't under question, the side using them is. You can't just assume that the side you're politically disagreeing with is the cause of a problem, especially considering the fact the rebels have so many known terrorist groups within their ranks that are completely willing to use such weapons with no ramifications.[/QUOTE]Yeah, that picture and it's point totally went over your head. That's Colin Powell, at a senate hearing prior to our 2003 invasion of Iraq. He's making the case for the invasion by asserting that Saddam was manufacturing chemical weapons and was probably going to sell them to terrorist groups. The purpose of the picture in this thread is to illustrate how fear mongering in the government spurred the United States to take military action in the Middle East, and how history is essentially repeating itself.

[QUOTE=BusterBluth;41979140]The chemical attack in Syria was more advanced than a couple of guys throwing plastic bags. Please do give a source where the U.S is funding a terrorist faction and when they received chemical weapons with the artillery to use it. It's also great you call them "Head Choppers" when factions with the Syrian government are doing the very same thing.[/QUOTE] Read again and read properly, SAUDI FUNDING (also previously Qatar before the fall out, may still be active). Saudi Arabian manufactured chemicals have also been found in terrorist hideouts. Hezbollah fighters have been experiencing chemical gas symptoms after having pursued Rebels. (src: Yalibnan) US Chemical Training [url]http://www.globalresearch.ca/pentagon-contractors-have-trained-the-terrorists-in-the-use-of-chemical-weapons-in-syria/5334394[/url] Sarin Gas : a new propaganda campaign against Syria [url]http://www.voltairenet.org/article179900.html[/url] Also today, we could read about plausible evidence that the US ( CIA ) had assisted Saddam Hussein in gassing the iranians. [url]http://english.farsnews.com/newstext.aspx?nn=13920604001261[/url] Le Figaro US, Israeli agents train rebels [url]http://www.lefigaro.fr/international/2013/08/22/01003-20130822ARTFIG00438-syrie-l-operation-anti-assad-a-commence.php[/url] Syrian Rebels on US payroll [url]http://www.worldtribune.com/2013/07/25/thousands-of-syrian-police-who-joined-the-rebels-are-on-u-s-payroll/[/url] This is not a civil war either, German intelligence has concluded that ca 95 % of the rebels (AlQaeda, AlNusra, etc...all in all from some 29 countries, funneled in via a Turkish and Jordanian corridor). Weapons are being bought on the black market, routed from Croatia via Israel to Turkey to the Head Choppers and Cut Throats, rapists and Sharia Butchers. They also seem very fond of burning people alive. And before you speak of atrocities committed by the Gov forces, keep in mind that this is a war, and these soldiers are defending their nation and their people from Islamist extremist, medieval Salafi, Takfiri and Wahhabi sects, funded, sponsored, backed and trained by the US and its allies. If the Chinese invaded the US, and starting beheading, raping and killing, would you give them cookies and milk and ask them nicely to stop? Robert S Ford, US ambassador to Syria, imported the Death Squads there, as taught by Negroponte. You know what they say, wherever Robert Ford is, the Death Squads are not far behind. In other words, the "Salvador Solution".

[QUOTE=Jsm;41979391]I thought it was generally agreed that the rebels don't have any sort of delivery ability like what was clearly used last week.[/QUOTE] Yeah, not like the rebels could have had them smuggled in by known terrorist groups (which have the ability to get these things) or have stolen them from the government. Nope, no one ever steals things in war. [editline]26th August 2013[/editline] [QUOTE=JumpinJackFlash;41979401]Yeah, that picture and it's point totally went over your head. That's Colin Powell, at a senate hearing prior to our 2003 invasion of Iraq. He's making the case for the invasion by asserting that Saddam was manufacturing chemical weapons and was probably going to sell them to terrorist groups. The purpose of the picture in this thread is to illustrate how fear mongering in the government spurred the United States to take military action in the Middle East, and how history is essentially repeating itself.[/QUOTE] I'm so sorry I don't recognize every U.S. politician who ever lived during my lifetime. Sarcasm aside, it's good to have a face to the name now, thanks for the information in that regard. [editline]26th August 2013[/editline] [QUOTE=BusterBluth;41979056]The Syrian government is the only group confirmed to have chemical weapons and posses the ability to use them, it's not a Blum assumption.[/QUOTE] Again, just because they have them doesn't mean they're the only possible group using them. A established nation has much more to loose from using such tactics than a group of terrorists with no official ties to any established nations.

[QUOTE=BusterBluth;41979140]Please do give a source where the U.S is funding a terrorist faction and when they received chemical weapons with the artillery to use it. It's also great you call them "Head Choppers" when factions with the Syrian government are doing the very same thing.[/QUOTE] [url=http://www.cnn.com/2013/07/23/politics/us-syrian-rebels]USA approves arming rebels[/url] [url=http://www.globalresearch.ca/cia-secretly-providing-training-for-syrian-rebels/5340018]cia secretly Training rebels[/url] (I'd post the RT article but I'm sure you'll just pull the "omg Russian biased media" [url=https://www.google.ca/url?sa=t&source=web&cd=3&cad=rja&ved=0CDMQFjAC&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.reuters.com%2Farticle%2F2013%2F08%2F24%2Fus-syria-crisis-jobar-idUSBRE97N04T20130824&ei=nwIcUo_JLMmf2QWf5oDADA&usg=AFQjCNHteHwin59duf7VJfKZwUoVtwsiFw&sig2=uL4J8jeW5wv-MjriQYc5Lg&bvm=bv.51156542,d.b2I]syrian army finds chemical agents in tunnel[/url] If that doesn't suffice feel free googling. It's not hard ;) Also you're implying chemical weapons can only be used in artillery which is not the case. Also I don't believe the army is beheading their enemies and letting them bleed out like the pig terrorists. So I ask you for some evidence to support your claim

[QUOTE=PassTheBong;41979462][url=http://www.cnn.com/2013/07/23/politics/us-syrian-rebels]USA approves arming rebels[/url] [url=http://www.globalresearch.ca/cia-secretly-providing-training-for-syrian-rebels/5340018]cia secretly Training rebels[/url] (I'd post the RT article but I'm sure you'll just pull the "omg Russian biased media" [url=https://www.google.ca/url?sa=t&source=web&cd=3&cad=rja&ved=0CDMQFjAC&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.reuters.com%2Farticle%2F2013%2F08%2F24%2Fus-syria-crisis-jobar-idUSBRE97N04T20130824&ei=nwIcUo_JLMmf2QWf5oDADA&usg=AFQjCNHteHwin59duf7VJfKZwUoVtwsiFw&sig2=uL4J8jeW5wv-MjriQYc5Lg&bvm=bv.51156542,d.b2I]syrian army finds chemical agents in tunnel[/url] If that doesn't suffice feel free googling. It's not hard ;) Also you're implying chemical weapons can only be used in artillery which is not the case. Also I don't believe the army is beheading their enemies and letting them bleed out like the pig terrorists. So I ask you for some evidence to support your claim[/QUOTE] Many Takfiri and Al Qaeda ( NATO infantry ) have been released and been issued new traveling documents if they agreed to sign an agreement that they would not fight Syria. There are videos to prove that, just visit ANNA News they are all there, and can be translated from Russian. BTW I would trust RT way more than I trust FOX, CNN or the [B]Bush and Blair Corporation[/B], commonly known as [B]BBC[/B].

Would this guy really have been a better president than Bush?

[QUOTE=Banhfunbags;41979501]Would this guy really have been a better president than Bush?[/QUOTE] I don't think there would have been that big of a difference, they have at least one thing in common, both are part of (or have been part of) skull and bones. There is a saying, if the US had a third party, they could have had a two party system. But then again, what do I know of US politics, I am Swedish. [editline]27th August 2013[/editline] Zbigniew Brzezinski tweeted this a few hours ago: "The geopolitical context of Kosovo in 1999 and Syria now are vastly different-we must not rush into a bellicose foolhardy response à la 2003" I think he is referring to the fact that at that time, Russia's leader was drunk Jeltsin, now there is astute Putin. Blackmail has never worked with Putin, and if we were to believe intelligence sources, there are 250 S300 anti aircraft missiles in Syria, and a set of weapons "never seen before" that "never miss their targets". Also nuclear capable Iskanders ready to take out the Patriot batteries in Jordan and Turkey. Everything around Syria's "borders". Including Supersonic Yakhonts.

[QUOTE=draugur;41979424]Yeah, not like the rebels could have had them smuggled in by known terrorist groups (which have the ability to get these things) or have stolen them from the government. Nope, no one ever steals things in war. [/QUOTE] By that logic, its entirely possible the CIA snuck in and did it to frame the Syrian government. Or that the Russians did to frame the CIA.

[QUOTE=Jsm;41979737]By that logic, its entirely possible the CIA snuck in and did it to frame the Syrian government. Or that the Russians did to frame the CIA.[/QUOTE] Maybe Mossad did it so we would fuck up Syria for them. :v:

I recommend watching a short debate on the issue with Webster G. Tarpley, Ph.D. debating investigative journalist Lee Kaplan. [url]http://tarpley.net/[/url]

[QUOTE=joqqy;41979418] This is not a civil war either, German intelligence has concluded that ca 95 % of the rebels (AlQaeda, AlNusra, etc...all in all from some 29 countries, funneled in via a Turkish and Jordanian corridor). [/QUOTE] yea sorry when you say crap like this I can pretty much ignore everything else you say. Please give me a citation assuming you can even dig one up.

[QUOTE=joqqy;41979521]and a set of weapons "never seen before" that "never miss their targets"[/QUOTE] what? what are you talking about?

[QUOTE=Jsm;41979737]By that logic, its entirely possible the CIA snuck in and did it to frame the Syrian government. Or that the Russians did to frame the CIA.[/QUOTE] Beginning to sound more and more like some sort of conspiracy. But I do disagree with the harsh rhetoric by Mr. Kerry, we should really have more evidence or hear what the U.N. investigation has to say before we start pointing fingers. I would very much not want the U.S. to get involved in Syria, yes it is a horrible civil war and tragedy but it's not our battle, why do we have to keep other middle eastern countries in check.

[QUOTE=ilikecorn;41979951]You do realize the research and acquisition budget for the US Armed forces is IMMENSE. There are weapons systems, and anti missile systems, that haven't ever been seen before. Also, "nuclear capable" describes pretty much any rocket these days, it's not like it's a special designation. Hell, your run of the mill tomahawk is nuclear capable.[/QUOTE] Nuclear weapons are meaningless, I wouldn't even call them weapons, I think you know why. Brzezinski puts it well, on why this situation is a bit more complex. [url]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0SXBeMhIgFo[/url] [url]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3J0URG9xoGg[/url]

[QUOTE=Aman;41979858]yea sorry when you say crap like this I can pretty much ignore everything else you say. Please give me a citation assuming you can even dig one up.[/QUOTE] [img]http://puu.sh/4bQuP.png[/img] WOW THAT TOTALLY DIDNT TAKE ME FIVE SECONDS dipshit it's pretty obvious that Mossad are the main instigators with CIA and other agencies as their lap dogs. with more and more bullshit propaganda from AIPAC and our scumbag senators, it's clear that only Israel really stands to gain from this. they're looking to eliminate the remainder of their political enemies (iraq, jordan, egypt, lebanon). Iran is next after syria, just watch. [highlight](User was banned for this post ("Flaming" - Craptasket))[/highlight]

[QUOTE=tzoz;41979990][IMG]http://puu.sh/4bQuP.png[/IMG] WOW THAT TOTALLY DIDNT TAKE ME FIVE SECONDS dipshit[/QUOTE] I'd like a 1st hand source not google dipshit. And all of those links are just 2nd hand crap news sites repeating the same copy and pasted article from SANA (Syrian state news, so unbiased!) which talks about "Die Welt" some German newspaper. Nothing from actually intelligence groups, just Die Welt newspaper and SANA. This is the only instance of this mythical 95%. No concrete source whatsoever.

[QUOTE=Aman;41980021]I'd like a 1st hand source not google dipshit. And all of those links are just 2nd hand crap news sites repeating the same copy and pasted article from "Die Welt" some German newspaper. Nothing from actually intelligence groups, just Die Welt newspaper. This is the only instance of this mythical 95%. No concrete source whatsoever.[/QUOTE] nothing gets past you, does it? keep on moving the goalposts.

[QUOTE=tzoz;41980041]nothing gets past you, does it? keep on moving the goalposts.[/QUOTE] I'm sorry I don't consider some dubious 1 paragraph long article from Syrian state news as somehow proof "95%" of rebels aren't Syrian. It's just fantasy. It's actually pretty baffling you or anyone actually believes it.

This is the worst fucking argument I've ever seen in SH, and I've seen some bad arguments.

[QUOTE=Jsm;41979737]By that logic, its entirely possible the CIA snuck in and did it to frame the Syrian government. [/QUOTE] Well they have done shit like that before...

[QUOTE=Jsm;41979737]By that logic, its entirely possible the CIA snuck in and did it to frame the Syrian government. Or that the Russians did to frame the CIA.[/QUOTE] I'd accuse you of using a slippery slope fallacy, but judging by anyone else arguing in this thread, I'd rather not stoop to the level of stupidity being expressed on either side here.